Time to get angry

[Gibbon]

I take it you haven't been in the children's section of JL recently then as they aren't dinosaurs.

If you're not referring to pyjama motifs, then I guess you're missing the point. But if I explained to you then I would be accused of mansplaining.

[Paralytic]

All those people making comments should all be ashamed of themselves in assuming the gender of the vandal. Nowhere in the advert does it tell us what the little sh!t self-identifies as.

(I suspect it changes daily, based on his/her/their mother's* parenting style)

* An assumption on my part for simplification purposes, based on the sterotypical clothing choice, but not a label. It might actually be his/her/their father.

[SueEllen]

All those people making comments should all be ashamed of themselves in assuming the gender of the vandal. Nowhere in the advert does it tell us what the little sh!t self-identifies as.

(I suspect it changes daily, based on his/her/their mother's* parenting style)

* An assumption on my part for simplification purposes, based on the sterotypical clothing choice, but not a label. It might actually be his/her/their father.

Oh no I've outed myself as a terf...

[hobnob]

How is it an advert? If you just let your kid carry on doing that, would insurance pay out?

My first thought exactly .... are John Lewis confirming that they pay out on intentional damage to household items.

In fairness, John Lewis (sort of) addressed this:
https://twitter.com/JohnLewisRetail/...740138502?s=20
(This tweet was included in the Independent article that SueEllen linked to in the original post.)

"He is not wilfully damaging his home and is unaware of the unintentional consequences of his actions."

However, if the mother sits there watching while he rampages around, I think that might affect the outcome. I.e. the child might be oblivious, but the adult should know better. (I'm also not convinced that deliberately picking up someone's paint tray and dropping it on the carpet is "unintentional", but I'll defer to JLP on that.)

[d000hg]

What with the kid being made to clean up their mess?

Probably

The child is clearly doing it intentionally unless they are autistic or suffer some other disorder.

[Mordac]

"He is not wilfully damaging his home and is unaware of the unintentional consequences of his actions."

In my day, the consequences would have been severe, bordering on fatal...

[northernladuk]

I was dreading watching this looking at all the comments but I've got to admit I don't see anything wrong with it at all. I mean, it's a tulip advert, I had absolutely no idea what it was selling/telling me to be fair but I did think the lad was very good in it.

I just don't get why sexism, violence, gender or what really has to come in to absolutely everything, particularly something as inconsequential as an advert like this.

[d000hg]

You mean you don't think it depicts trans people as violent?

[xoggoth]

to be fair but I did think the lad was very good in it

True. Maybe he'll be a film star in the future.

[ladymuck]

I was dreading watching this looking at all the comments but I've got to admit I don't see anything wrong with it at all. I mean, it's a tulip advert, I had absolutely no idea what it was selling/telling me to be fair but I did think the lad was very good in it.

I just don't get why sexism, violence, gender or what really has to come in to absolutely everything, particularly something as inconsequential as an advert like this.

Yeah I'm with you. The lad was very good but the advert is exceptionally poor.

I don't think there's anything to be said about the mother and sister in it - they had a look of resignation about them that said "Tarquin is doing his thing again" and I suspect that is all they're there for, rather than any form of social commentary. The advert wouldn't lose its meaning if they weren't in it because it has very little meaning to begin with.

I would say there is very little that is accidental about what he does and I'm pretty sure the character knows what he's doing so JL's comment about him not being aware of the consequences of his actions, so they'd be happy to pay out, is bollocks. I would absolutely love to see someone make an insurance claim for that.